These collections are filled mostly with leftist theory, sociology, history, philosophy, political science, some econ. Sorry, STEM majors.
This is a personal blog and I talk about/repost whatever I find interesting, diverting, or beautiful. Topics include but aren't limited to: politics, feminism, race/ethnicity, social/economic justice, art, history, literature, cute animals, pop culture, other nonsense. I credit/link back to sources whenever possible. More about this blog
If this is the wave of the future, it makes nonsense of just about all the conventional wisdom on reducing inequality. Better education won’t do much to reduce inequality if the big rewards simply go to those with the most assets. Creating an “opportunity society”, or whatever it is the likes of Paul Ryan etc. are selling this week, won’t do much if the most important asset you can have in life is, well, lots of assets inherited from your parents. And so on.
For many men it is unthinkable that women could possess a technical competence equal to their own. Women would have to be paragons of competence to be accepted by male colleagues (Cockburn, 1985, 188)
Finn, Geraldine. Voices of Women, Voices of Feminism: Limited Edition. Fernwood Publishing; Halifax. 1993. (pg. 113)
Relevant: a recent study that found women face persistent gender bias in the sciences:
Science professors at American universities widely regard female undergraduates as less competent than male students with the same accomplishments and skills, a new study by researchers at Yale concluded.
I’d wager that you’d find similar results if you conducted the same experiment in other fields.
I tell my students, ‘When you get these jobs that you have been so brilliantly trained for, just remember that your real job is that if you are free, you need to free somebody else. If you have some power, then your job is to empower somebody else.
As many as 15 percent of freshmen at America’s top schools are white students who failed to meet their university’s minimum standards for admission, according to Peter Schmidt, deputy editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education. These kids are “people with a long-standing relationship with the university,” or in other words, the children of faculty, wealthy alumni and politicians.
According to Schmidt, these unqualified but privileged kids are nearly twice as common on top campuses as Black and Latino students who had benefited from affirmative action.
This is EXTREMELY blatant on college campuses. The fact that these things need to be clarified is sad.
Legacy is the real affirmative action…and yet we don’t see certain types of entitled people suing to dismantle that.
YUP I went to a school with so many kids like that. One dude had the nerve to go on and ON about affirmative action and how it was unfair and yet he was a legacy and his brother got into MIT because his father put in a call. Did he see any problem? Of course not.(via sunny1)
Rebloggable by request:
did cutting pell grant funding REALLY save money? isn’t education like. the Very Best Investment?
You’d think that. Let’s get a little perspective. From FY2001 to the end of FY2012, taxpayers spent $1.4 trillion on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. That’s $1,400,000,000,000. If you were to pile all those dollar bills and stick it on a scale, it would be about 1,543,235 tons. Or about 289 Chevy Silverado pickup trucks.
That’s pretty heavy.
You know what else is pretty heavy? Thinking about what we could have gotten for that money instead. Check it out:
- 634.6 million Annual Energy Costs for a Household for One Year OR
- 706.5 million Children Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
- 20.3 million Elementary School Teachers for One Year OR
- 133.4 million Fair Market Rent for One Bedroom Apartment for One Year OR
- 181.3 million Head Start Slots for Children for One Year OR
- 594.5 million Households Converted to All Solar Energy for One Year OR
- 1.2 billion Households Converted to All Wind Energy for One Year OR
- 176.7 million Military Veterans Receiving VA Medical Care for One Year OR
- 658.5 million One Year Worth of Groceries for an Individual OR
- 283.5 million People Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
- 19.8 million Police or Sheriff’s Patrol Officers for One Year OR
- 174.8 million Scholarships for University Students for One Year OR
- 248.3 million Students receiving Pell Grants of $5550
You might say, “But that’s all the war spending! That’s not fair!” Here’s a few other comparisons. First, U.S. Defense spending for FY2012. That’s $544.3 billion. Here’s what we could get instead:
- 279.0 million Children Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
- 8.0 million Elementary School Teachers for One Year OR
- 71.6 million Head Start Slots for Children for One Year OR
- 234.8 million Households with Renewable Electricity - Solar Photovoltaic for One Year OR
- 493.0 million Households with Renewable Electricity-Wind Power for One Year OR
- 69.8 million Military Veterans Receiving VA Medical Care for One Year OR
- 111.9 million People Receiving Low-Income Healthcare for One Year OR
- 7.8 million Police or Sheriff’s Patrol Officers for One Year OR
- 69.0 million Scholarships for University Students for One Year
- OR 98.1 million Students receiving Pell Grants of $5550
Oh, but we need defense spending, right? Let’s examine weaponry. From 2001-2011, the U.S. fired over 11,000 Hellfire missiles in combat operations — keep in mind, this doesn’t count non-combat operations or testing. Each Hellfire costs roughly $68,000. That’s $748 million, or one year of full, $5,500 Pell Grants for 136,000 students.
Each F-16 Falcon Fighter costs $47 million. Or, 8,545 students could have Pell Grants of $5,550 for one year.
Each soldier in Afghanistan costs roughly $1.2 million per year. For that, we could give 218 students a full Pell Grant.
It’s not a question of cost. It’s a question of priorities. In FY2012, we spent $33.4 billion on Pell Grants — or six percent of the Department of Defense’s FY2012 budget.
But there’s always money for war, right?
And let’s not forget that a lot of people sign up for military service because they have no other way to fund a college education.
I’ve been reading some old commentary on Hugo Schwyzer due to this recent Tumblr post defending him, which was written by a woman who identifies him as a father figure. And I came across a blog post that explains why Schwyzer’s fatherliness is just more evidence why he can’t be trusted. He’s so sketchy that even other white male feminists are creeped the fuck out:
Here’s how Schwyzer described his relationship to his students not long ago:
Go ahead, call me paternalistic. I’ll wear that title with pride, thank you. I see my students not merely as independent, autonomous agents whom I need to empower, but as vulnerable young people whom I — and others around me — need to protect. And I still have the nerve to call myself a feminist.
This notion that feminism calls him to protect the weak — to save them from themselves, to guide them to the right path — recurs again and again in his writing. As the co-organizer of the LA Slutwalk earlier this year, he referred to his role as “Herding sluts. In the best and most responsible way.” His students say he’s an electrifying lecturer, but complain that he severely restricts class discussion. And he frequently conceptualizes moral behavior as a matter of denial and restriction. (He has, for instance, described feminism as a “cold pool” in which “none of us can fully immerse ourselves forever.”)
I don’t have any reason to believe that Hugo Schwyzer is likely to attempt another murder anytime soon. But the man who described his girlfriend as fragile and broken and in need of his sheltering strength as he plotted her death has not gone entirely away. The paternalistic impulse to save that young woman from herself — an impulse that came to him with “incredible clarity” then, one which he remembers “perfectly” today — is still in him, still driving him. It’s an impulse he’s redirected, but it remains unexamined, unchecked, and dangerous. (It particularly inflects and infects his writing about sexuality, about youth, and about people of color.)
There’s nothing pro-women, feminist, or new about being a man who wants to rescue, protect, teach and otherwise be the master to women, particularly young and vulnerable women (like the one who wrote that Tumblr post). That’s pretty much the essence of patriarchy.